tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post2075867426195637089..comments2019-05-17T10:58:11.586-04:00Comments on Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Gregory of Nyssa's Unwritten Traditions....James Swanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-78078299654170327052009-07-07T19:02:07.722-04:002009-07-07T19:02:07.722-04:00LOLLOLTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-91884316239041853852009-07-07T15:40:58.150-04:002009-07-07T15:40:58.150-04:00I had assumed you both at least understood what we...<i>I had assumed you both at least understood what we mean by sola scriptura, your comments suggest you both do not.</i><br /><br />I have thoroughly refuted this bogus charge:<br /><br />http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2009/07/john-q-doe-sez-i-dont-know-or.htmlDave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-22929719765070245912009-07-07T01:05:39.991-04:002009-07-07T01:05:39.991-04:00To all involved in this mini comment war. I have a...To all involved in this mini comment war. I have a question. It doesn;t have anything directly to do with Gregory of Nyssa, but it does concern tradition. I have been reading things about the Orthodox Churches (Greek, Coptic, Russian etc...)and it seems that there are quite a few groups much older than Protestantism, which are unafilliated with RC, and only loosley afilliated with each other that all seem to share the same, or very very similar beliefs. My question is this: How is it that all these really old Churches which seem to rely on the same, or much of the same, body of Traditions could have all gotten so many of the same things wrong in the same way? I refer to things like veneration of saints, the eucharist, and purgatory. I realize that the beliefs are not always identical, but they are normally very similar differing only on finer points. The papacy not withstanding. So to reiterate, how could all of these different bodies made the same basic mistakes on the same basic topics? Doesn&#39;t the idea that oral tradition is unreliable mitigate against such uniformity? <br />For the record I am not Catholic or Orthodox, nor am I a Protestant. I am unsure which is correct at this point. All I know for sure is that Jesus Christ is who he said he is, and he came to do what he said he came to do. &quot;I came to seek and save that which is lost&quot;.Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14533329349221228892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-80101346425253267152009-07-07T00:36:40.684-04:002009-07-07T00:36:40.684-04:00It certainly wasn&#39;t Tim Enloe&#39;s plans to h...It certainly wasn&#39;t Tim Enloe&#39;s plans to have all his interminable ranting and raving and running from every challenge chronicled on my site. LOLDave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-38945406545870791182009-07-06T21:00:07.184-04:002009-07-06T21:00:07.184-04:00Paul Hoffer stated, Hello Mr. Swan, using your log...Paul Hoffer stated, <i>Hello Mr. Swan, using your logic, one could argue that Catholics believe in some form of sola scriptura since we do acknowledge it as authoritative.</i> Dave Armstrong stated: <i>If Gregory of Nyssa can be SS, why not me?! </i><br /><br />Shame on me. I had assumed you both at least understood what we mean by sola scriptura, your comments suggest you both do not.For a simple book on the subject, pick up Dr. White&#39;s book, Scripture Alone: Exploring The Bible&#39;s Accuracy, Authority, and Authenticity. For a detailed explanation, pick up David King&#39;s book, Holy Scripture vol. 1, A Biblical Defense of the Reformation Principle of Sola Scriptura. The former book can be purchased via aomin.org, the later can be purchased via the link on my sidebar (the green book). <br /><br />Best wishes with your studies.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-9581964420262319652009-07-06T20:32:12.378-04:002009-07-06T20:32:12.378-04:00Ah, so you act the fool to further goals now? I t...Ah, so you act the fool to further goals now? I thought you were just expressing the same lack of reading skills with respect to my comment that you exhibit with respect to the early church fathers. I didn&#39;t realize it was all part of your master strategy! How many folks were duped by your act! You&#39;re the David at Gath of the apologetics world! Congratulations!<br /><br />But do you realize that all of your mocking of so-called &quot;anti-Catholics&quot; and &quot;quasi-anti-Catholics&quot; and &quot;hemi-demi-semi-quasi-Anti-catholics&quot; over the years might have been accomplishing the secret strategy of one of those groups? Maybe it was Tim Enloe&#39;s plan all along to be mocked by you so as to further his elaborate scheme to turn regular Catholics into Reformed Catholics, or something like that?<br /><br />That may be your Ziklag! You better go back and check!<br /><br />But I tease, and at some point your co-religionists will call foul (which is our secret goal - the more times they call the foul, the more ... oh nevermind).Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-75613802865064645192009-07-06T18:52:49.039-04:002009-07-06T18:52:49.039-04:00That&#39;s exactly how we want it. The more unoppo...That&#39;s exactly how we want it. The more unopposed I am because I am a joke, a dolt, supposedly full of myself, etc., then the more I can accomplish my goal of helping Catholics be more confident in their faith and persuading non-Catholics to become Catholic (and I&#39;ve received reports for a dozen years now of many hundreds doing just that). <br /><br />So, y&#39;all go right ahead and do so. I don&#39;t mind the insults, as long as my goals are furthered and encouraged. In fact, I can&#39;t think of any better way to accomplish them. It&#39;s perfect.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-11093725016161008502009-07-06T18:41:05.322-04:002009-07-06T18:41:05.322-04:00And lest you fail to properly understand that last...And lest you fail to properly understand that last comment: No, I did not actually consult a freshman high school student.Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-31640549286627084642009-07-06T18:34:03.592-04:002009-07-06T18:34:03.592-04:00I consulted a 9th grader who informed me that the ...I consulted a 9th grader who informed me that the appropriate reply to Dave is: &quot;nuh-uh, <b>you&#39;re</b> a joke.&quot;<br /><br />(eyeroll)Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-48955995905983120032009-07-06T17:29:46.158-04:002009-07-06T17:29:46.158-04:00Since you have claimed elsewhere that I am not an ...Since you have claimed elsewhere that I am not an orthodox Catholic, at least the first part of your comment was expressing your literal opinion. Therefore, it was not obvious from your comment that you got my joke. But it IS obvious that your position on my alleged heterodoxy is a big joke, and always has been.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-72766979017364152542009-07-06T16:37:41.818-04:002009-07-06T16:37:41.818-04:00Just playing along with your joke, Dave, as you sh...Just playing along with your joke, Dave, as you should have realized from the second half of my comment.Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-6584555228697710202009-07-06T15:54:57.677-04:002009-07-06T15:54:57.677-04:00If nothing else works, you (reformed group) could ...If nothing else works, you (reformed group) could fall back on the line that the ECFs are not infallible. I&#39;m just saying.<br /><br />Paul: &quot;The problem with taking statements what St. Gregory wrote in isolation of the other material he wrote is to ignore the fact that he, as a bishop of the Catholic Church was writing from within the Church. I think it&#39;s great that you are taking the time to read the writings of Catholic saints, but in no way has what he quotes in any way refute what the Church taught then or now about Apostolic Tradition. Now if you had found something that the brother of St. Basil wrote that explicitly stated that Apostolic Tradition was not to be considered, then your argument might have some legs, but you didn&#39;t. The best that you can do is argue that it would appear that there is a paucity of statements in regard to Apostolic Tradition.&quot;<br /><br />Me: This argument certainly seems reasonable to me. When we look at how the Church practiced its faith, whether through the use of icons, deference to Rome, Liturgy, etc., we see that our interpretation of what the ECFs wrote nicely fits with the historical record. I find it very hard to conclude that the reformer’s argument in any way settles the matter. It seems to me that in this case unless you(reformers) can show a clear indication that the traditional understanding of an ECF’s claim is wrongheaded, then why should I accept your novel interpretation?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08353069946995823072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-52035003369343469112009-07-06T14:41:49.321-04:002009-07-06T14:41:49.321-04:00LOL Obviously you missed the joke.LOL Obviously you missed the joke.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-10870105941291814422009-07-06T14:14:06.252-04:002009-07-06T14:14:06.252-04:00That fits my theme about how you&#39;re not really...That fits my theme about how you&#39;re not really in line with orthodox Roman Catholic teaching, Dave.<br /><br />But no ... Gregory of Nyssa was <i>Sola Sriptura</i> in ways you are not.<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-24889348841754898892009-07-06T12:21:32.055-04:002009-07-06T12:21:32.055-04:00It&#39;s been proven that I believe in sola Script...It&#39;s been proven that I believe in sola Scriptura myself (even though I&#39;ve now written two books against it):<br /><br />http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/02/if-church-fathers-can-be-amazingly.html<br /><br />If Gregory of Nyssa can be SS, why not me?! See:<br /><br />http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/02/did-st-gregory-of-nyssa-believe-in.htmlDave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-45341107617871946552009-07-06T11:35:28.771-04:002009-07-06T11:35:28.771-04:00Mr. Hoffer,
With all due respect, it is you (not ...Mr. Hoffer,<br /><br />With all due respect, it is you (not us) putting forward quotations in isolation. And I&#39;m not putting myself forward as anything more than what my work on the subject demonstrates. Whether it demonstrates familiarity with a broad spectrum or a single quotation in isolation, I leave for the reader to decide.<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-13939081106444548332009-07-06T11:13:14.863-04:002009-07-06T11:13:14.863-04:00Hello Mr. Swan, using your logic, one could argue ...Hello Mr. Swan, using your logic, one could argue that Catholics believe in some form of sola scriptura since we do acknowledge it as authoritative. <br /><br />To Mr. Fan as well:<br /><br />The problem with taking statements what St. Gregory wrote in isolation of the other material he wrote is to ignore the fact that he, as a bishop of the Catholic Church was writing from within the Church. I think it&#39;s great that you are taking the time to read the writings of Catholic saints, but in no way has what he quotes in any way refute what the Church taught then or now about Apostolic Tradition. Now if you had found something that the brother of St. Basil wrote that explicitly stated that Apostolic Tradition was not to be considered, then your argument might have some legs, but you didn&#39;t. The best that you can do is argue that it would appear that there is a paucity of statements in regard to Apostolic Tradition.<br /><br />BTW, since you are apparently putting yourself forward as an authority on St. Gregory of Nyssa, do you believe that a belief in sola scriptura is the only plausible reason as to why he might not have cited to Apostolic Tradition as he did to Scripture ion the excerpts you cited?Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-46656216350638830352009-07-06T07:19:59.228-04:002009-07-06T07:19:59.228-04:00PH wrote: &quot;Seriously, if folks are going to m...PH wrote: &quot;Seriously, if folks are going to make arguments that St. Gregory of Nyssa wrote this and St. Gregory of Nyssa wrote that, wouldn&#39;t it make sense to put down everything he wrote on the subject so that the reader gets a fair picture of what the Saint wrote so they can decide for themselves. I have not made a study of everything he wrote, but the above statement tends to put into question the notion that St. Gregory adhered to sola scriptura.&quot;<br /><br />I&#39;ve done that (provided a pretty comprehensive picture of Gregory&#39;s writings on the subject) at the post I linked to above. I included that comment among the quotations I addressed. It&#39;s toward the bottom of the post. What Gregory is saying is simply that &quot;this is what we&#39;ve always believed&quot; is an adequate rebuttal to &quot;undemonstrated nonsense.&quot; However, Gregory does not go on (in that context, or any other that I&#39;ve found or been pointed to) to rely on an historical argument rather than a Scriptural argument.<br /><br />Instead, over and over again, Gregory&#39;s arguments are either rational/common sense arguments or Scriptural arguments - and usually the rational/common sense arguments are based on Scripture.<br /><br />And, of course, that doesn&#39;t make Gregory&#39;s views and my views on every doctrine exactly alike, because (as your co-religionists remind us) that&#39;s not necessarily the result of <i>Sola Scriptura</i>.<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-4206419035161691372009-07-06T06:25:46.520-04:002009-07-06T06:25:46.520-04:00Mr Hoffer stated, &quot;The bottom line is that on...Mr Hoffer stated, <i>&quot;The bottom line is that one can not take a couple of sentences from one of the ECF&#39;s and state he believes in sola scriptura when there is so much of his writings that refute it.&quot;</i><br /><br />Paul, the same applies to the material you just posted. One cannot take a couple of sentences from one of the ECF&#39;s and assume they adhere to a Romanist paradigm of Scripture + infallible extra-biblical Tradition + an infallible magisterium. Simply because an ECF may use the word &quot;tradition&quot; does not mean he would qualify be on staff at Catholic Answers. <br /><br />As to the quotes you listed, as far as I can tell from my cursory reading of Gregory of Nyssa, his language reflects his understanding of sacred scripture. The arguments I would have with him would be over his interpretation of the Biblical text, not his use of words that may not be found in the Bible. I, nor Tur8, would ever ague an extra-biblical word or description necessarily implies a denial of sola scriptura. BTW, read Tur8&#39;s recent blog entry in which he states, &quot;If one takes the time to read the material presented, one will reach the conclusion that Gregory of Nyssa practiced at least some form of Sola Scriptura.&quot; <br /><br />If somewhere Gregory argued for an existent sacred deposit of infallible content outside of Scripture by which to judge disputes, I&#39;d be interested in reviewing that material, as well as seeing exactly what content he placed in that set. i&#39;m always interested to find out what is in the &quot;Tradition&quot; set, as it varies from Catholic to Catholic. <br /><br />I admit, many of the Church fathers cited by Catholic apologists did embrace a form of tradition that was independent of Scripture. More often than not though, that &quot;Tradition&quot; refers to liturgical rites of practices like baptism or the Eucharist. Most often, doctrine was not in view. <br /><br />After discussing Basil and other Early Church Fathers, the great patristic scholar J.N.D. Kelly noted, &quot;Indeed, all the instances of unwritten tradition lacking Scriptural support which the early theologians mention will be found, on examination to refer to matters of observance and practice (e.g. triple immersion in baptism; turning East for prayer) rather than of doctrine as such, although sometimes they are matters (e.g. infant baptism; prayers for the dead) in which doctrine is involved.&quot;James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-63634771238372601982009-07-06T00:07:21.270-04:002009-07-06T00:07:21.270-04:00BTW, do you think he developed this concept using ...BTW, do you think he developed this concept using sola scriptura or relying upon the Tradition?<br /><br />From The Great Catechism<br /> <br />&quot;He disseminates Himself in every believer through that flesh, whose substance comes from bread and wine, blending Himself with the bodies of believers, to secure that, by this union with the immortal, man, too, may be a sharer in incorruption. He gives these gifts by virtue of the benediction through which He transelements the natural quality of these visible things to that immortal thing.&quot;<br /><br />&quot;The bread again is at first common bread; but when the mystery sanctifies it, it is called and actually becomes the Body of Christ. So too the mystical oil, so too the wine; if they are things of little worth before the blessing, after their sanctification by the Spirit each of them has its own superior operation. This same power of the word also makes the priest venerable and honorable, separated from the generality of men by the new blessing bestowed upon him.&quot; (Sermon on the Day of Lights or On the Baptism of Christ) <br /><br />&quot;He offered Himself for us, Victim and Sacrifice, and Priest as well, and &quot;Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.&quot; When did He do this? When He made His own Body food and His own Blood drink for His disciples; for this much is clear enough to anyone, that a sheep cannot be eaten by a man unless its being eaten be preceded by its being slaughtered. This giving of His own Body to His disciples for eating clearly indicates that the sacrifice of the Lamb has now been completed. (Sermon One on the Resurrection of Christ)<br /><br />Of course, we haven&#39;t gotten St. Gregory&#39;s Mariology yet. Didn&#39;t he write the following words in his letter Against Appolinarius:<br /><br /> &quot;You are adorned beyond every creature, beautified by the heavens, you shine more than the sun, are exalted above the angels, you were not taken away to the heavens, but remaining on earth you drew to yourself the Lord of heaven and the King of the Universe!&quot; <br /><br />And of course, he found this in the Bible too: &quot;[Mary], pious and dutiful, the honour of our nature, the gate of our life, the one who won salvation for us.&quot; first Marian apparation? <br /><br />You were aware that he taught Mary&#39;s perpetual virginity? That Mary is the New Eve? That she is Theotokos? <br /><br />The bottom line is that one can not take a couple of sentences from one of the ECF&#39;s and state he believes in sola scriptura when there is so much of his writings that refute it. What an ECF believes has to be taken from considering the whole of his works, not just parts of his works<br /><br />God bless!Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-25388559805416743332009-07-06T00:06:53.587-04:002009-07-06T00:06:53.587-04:00Hi all, St. Gregory of Nyssad in Book, Chapter VI ...Hi all, St. Gregory of Nyssad in Book, Chapter VI of his treatise against Euonomius said this, &quot;<br /><br />&quot;And let no one interrupt me, by saying that what we confess should also be confirmed by constructive reasoning: for it is enough for proof of our statement, that the tradition has come down to us from our fathers, handled on, like some inheritance, by succession from the apostles and the saints who came after them. They, on the other hand, who change their doctrines to this novelty, would need the support of arguments in abundance, if they were about to bring over to their views, not men light as dust, and unstable, but men of weight and steadiness: but so long as their statement is advanced without being established, and without being proved, who is so foolish and so brutish as to account the teaching of the evangelists and apostles, and of those who have successively shone like lights in the churches, of less force than this undemonstrated nonsense?&quot;<br /><br />Is the above passage in the Protestant translation of his work? I realize that some of those guys leave out the Catholic stuff when they translate. Seriously, if folks are going to make arguments that St. Gregory of Nyssa wrote this and St. Gregory of Nyssa wrote that, wouldn&#39;t it make sense to put down everything he wrote on the subject so that the reader gets a fair picture of what the Saint wrote so they can decide for themselves. I have not made a study of everything he wrote, but the above statement tends to put into question the notion that St. Gregory adhered to sola scriptura. But then we Catholics and Orthodox must be really dumb to recognize some guy as a saint when he does not even believe what our Churches teach as doctrine.<br /><br />.Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-65755126304299992502009-07-05T23:30:58.118-04:002009-07-05T23:30:58.118-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-9345049328259506632009-07-05T19:05:54.053-04:002009-07-05T19:05:54.053-04:00And from what I&#39;ve read of Nyssa on Free Will ...And from what I&#39;ve read of Nyssa on Free Will ... I&#39;d hesitate to to call him a 4th century Calvinist, though he was <i>sola scriptura</i>.Turretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-88098472651883628302009-07-05T19:04:53.074-04:002009-07-05T19:04:53.074-04:00Mr. Martin,
&quot;You assume that he accepts sola...Mr. Martin,<br /><br />&quot;You assume that he accepts sola scriptura, that &quot;divinely inspired apostolic writings&quot; means the canonical books and the canonical books alone.&quot;<br /><br />Aside from your inaccurate characterization of <i>sola scriptura</i> as &quot;16th century Calvinism&quot; you&#39;ve given no support for your claim.<br /><br />You claim &quot;Divinely inspired writings of the apostles for him included the authoritative interpretation of those writings by bishops meeting in council at Nicea, for instance.&quot;<br /><br />A little support for this claim would be nice. I mean I have provided over 50 quotations showing him referring to Scriptures (<a href="http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-gregory-of-nyssa-considered.html" rel="nofollow">click here to see</a>), the human authors of Scriptures, and other prophets as &quot;inspired&quot; but never the council of Nicaea. Even if he might somewhere (in some place I managed to overlook) refer to Nicaea that way, it is certainly not his normal way of speaking.<br /><br />So (not to pile too much on Mr. Swan&#39;s question), what&#39;s the basis for your claim, beyond wishful thinking?<br /><br />-TurretinFanTurretinfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802277110253897379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-19079598000743014132009-07-04T22:42:11.849-04:002009-07-04T22:42:11.849-04:00Dennis stated, &quot;Divinely inspired writings of...Dennis stated, &quot;<i>Divinely inspired writings of the apostles for him included the authoritative interpretation of those writings by bishops meeting in council at Nicea, for instance.</i>&quot;<br /><br />I have a question.<br /><br />The actual text I cited states:<br /><br /><b>&quot;What Evangelist, what Apostle uttered such a saying? What prophet, or lawgiver, or patriarch, or any one else of those who were divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit, whose words are committed to writing, taught such a phrase?&quot;</b><br /><br />In this context, do you think he includes &quot;authoritative interpretation of those writings by bishops meeting in council at Nicaea&quot;?James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.com